I could use focus stacking as an alternative for some time if a better back would be a better long term investment. I'll look at the closest focus distance with the 47XL (without tilt). Very interesting that with up and down shift on the back one can stitch to equal a more wide angle lens. I imagine it may also reduce some of the distortion as well. I already stitch for architectural since I find when I want to convey the actual feeling of an area I get better results with my Leica point and shoot stitching rather than going wide with its zoom. (Or course I have to photomerge it).

I am very attracted to the high resolution, super color and contrast, and perspective control (architecture) of the medium format digital. I'm thinking I'd rather get those in order and perhaps use focus stacking for a bit and add a tilt/shift panel down the road. I'd have go give up tilt/swing bokeh in the mean time. It would be a little like returning to my Mamiya 7 days without tilt/swing but with shift. :-)

If 47mm is your lens of choice then you can stay with a 6x9 view camera and enjoy the full range of movementsJust make sure it's a geared one, for higher level of precision

There are quite a few "old school" arechitecture photographers out there using view cameras very successfully. It's only when they need to go wider than say 38mm or 35mm that they start looking at a pancake camera

An Aptus 22 can be had for relatively small money and it works beautifully on view cameras

Some 4x5 film photographers have gone to D800E and tilt shift lenses.Well known landscape photographer Jack Dykinga has switched from 4x5 view camera to a Nikon d800e and all three Nikon T/S lenses. http://www.dykinga.com/gear. That would fit your budget and smaller than the Fuji gx680.

Also here is an article where the D800E is compared to the largest MFDB and the article talks about large prints.You should find it interesting because the lens used on the Nikon is a 24mm tilt shift lens.

I wonder why he switched, it's probably more down to return rates on costs than actually thinking a D800 produces as good as a 5x4.Much less effort to shoot a D800 than 5x4. If you are shooting for fun not a living, I would get more kick from using a LF camera. In fact I just bought another one, nothing to do with resolution, DR or movements, just the journey from exposure to print.

It's not that Jack Dykinga just "switched." He's been shooting with Nikon cameras for awhile now. The D800 was not the "aha" moment. Not that it matters. He's a great photographer and could do well with any camera format he chooses.

I don't doubt Dykinga likes his Nikons. But it's also pretty clear he has a tight knit relationship with Nikon the Company. Biased? Maybe. Maybe not. It's funny that anyone associated with medium format digital---if you're a dealer here, you're "biased." If you provide actual experience with a Phase camera/MFDB, you're a "fan-boy."

To me, the most overlooked consideration in selecting/using a camera platform is the photographic experience. It is a very personal decision, and when made well, that is when the best images and joy in photography meet at the same time. That's nirvana.

I just don't understand why some people can't respect the personal decisions that others make in selecting their different camera platforms and respective formats, for what they suits them best.

Well known landscape photographer Jack Dykinga has switched from 4x5 view camera to a Nikon d800e and all three Nikon T/S lenses. http://www.dykinga.com/gear.

I had a look at his galleries. I find the pictures made with the Nikon quite different to the ones made with a view camera. I prefer the latter, but part of the reason is the colours which come from the use of film instead of digital capture.

Michael Reichmann interviewed him on LLVJ, he started using Nikon D3 at that time and he was very enthusiastic about it. He did not sell of his 4x5" gear and he never will according to his site. Why he switched, well horses for the races, I presume.

My guess is that D800E is good enough and is much more practical than film. With digital you have full control, no lab, no scanning. You are in charge.

I wonder why he switched, it's probably more down to return rates on costs than actually thinking a D800 produces as good as a 5x4.Much less effort to shoot a D800 than 5x4. If you are shooting for fun not a living, I would get more kick from using a LF camera. In fact I just bought another one, nothing to do with resolution, DR or movements, just the journey from exposure to print.

For me, there is quite a difference in experience between when I want to take a snapshot to record an image and when I want to create an image. In part, that is why I was interested in using a digital back on a 6x9 view camera, since those sometimes sell for very reasonable amounts on eBay as people move from film to digital. But, having learned that the digital backs are very sensitive to alignment of sensor and lens planes, I'd want to know I was not just buying frustration for my less than perfect eyes. It sounds like a Cambo DS with tilt may be a good way to go. Of course, it also sounds like an Arca M-2 or Linhof Techno would be best of both, but they are not budget options. I wonder how the alignment issue differs between a digital view camera like Arca M-2 or Techno and something like the Cambo? Are the Arca M-2 and Techno able to hold the alignment of sensor and lens planes as efficiently as the pancake cameras?

For me, there is quite a difference in experience between when I want to take a snapshot to record an image and when I want to create an image. In part, that is why I was interested in using a digital back on a 6x9 view camera, since those sometimes sell for very reasonable amounts on eBay as people move from film to digital. But, having learned that the digital backs are very sensitive to alignment of sensor and lens planes, I'd want to know I was not just buying frustration for my less than perfect eyes. It sounds like a Cambo DS with tilt may be a good way to go. Of course, it also sounds like an Arca M-2 or Linhof Techno would be best of both, but they are not budget options. I wonder how the alignment issue differs between a digital view camera like Arca M-2 or Techno and something like the Cambo? Are the Arca M-2 and Techno able to hold the alignment of sensor and lens planes as efficiently as the pancake cameras?

There is no magic with digital. There are two facts. One is that the sensor is flat. Film has been less flat. That means that it is easier to achieve optimum performance from the sensor.The sensor is smaller than 4x5" film so the image will be more enlarged.

My guess is that a camera intended for roll film would also work with digital. Another factor is that precision costs money.

For me, there is quite a difference in experience between when I want to take a snapshot to record an image and when I want to create an image. In part, that is why I was interested in using a digital back on a 6x9 view camera, since those sometimes sell for very reasonable amounts on eBay as people move from film to digital. But, having learned that the digital backs are very sensitive to alignment of sensor and lens planes, I'd want to know I was not just buying frustration for my less than perfect eyes. It sounds like a Cambo DS with tilt may be a good way to go. Of course, it also sounds like an Arca M-2 or Linhof Techno would be best of both, but they are not budget options. I wonder how the alignment issue differs between a digital view camera like Arca M-2 or Techno and something like the Cambo? Are the Arca M-2 and Techno able to hold the alignment of sensor and lens planes as efficiently as the pancake cameras?

To me, the most overlooked consideration in selecting/using a camera platform is the photographic experience. It is a very personal decision, and when made well, that is when the best images and joy in photography meet at the same time. That's nirvana.

I just don't understand why some people can't respect the personal decisions that others make in selecting their different camera platforms and respective formats, for what they suits them best.

ken

Absolutely! I couldn't agree more with Ken.

For some people shooting with medium format using inconvenient low tech cameras is a pleasure. The thoughtfulness that goes in to shooting and the experience can be a world of difference from that of the smaller DSLR platforms and enjoyable just for that. I totally respect why people choose to still shoot film, large format, medium format vintage cameras and all manner of atypical formats and mediums.

For an affordable medium format digital outfit, which might be unfathomable to those who might prefer to convince us that the Nikon D800 is the be-all and end-all of cameras, I definitely think that there are options using older technology backs. You don't need 33mp, 60mp, or the latest greatest technology to appreciate and enjoy shooting digitally with a traditional medium format camera. I know that when I started it was with a Kodak DCS back which today you can find for a pittance. Ditto the Mamiya ZD. A Kodak DCS Pro would be an interesting option if you can find one too. Ditto Imacon and earlier Phase backs in V mount.

If I were starting again with a limited budget then I'd seriously look at the Leaf Aptus range - 22, 65, 75, II 5 etc. Great backs.

I know this conversation went in a different direction but there's decent movement from the Mamiya Tilt shift bellows (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=72523.0) That you can mount of a 645 AFD and use a cheap back and manual focus lens on. The whole set up (including back) would run around 4k.

I know this conversation went in a different direction but there's decent movement from the Mamiya Tilt shift bellows (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=72523.0) That you can mount of a 645 AFD and use a cheap back and manual focus lens on. The whole set up (including back) would run around 4k.

You can't really do that much with this due to the image circle of the lenses. You can use the tilt and then the shift to try to get back into the image circle.

It is a bit more useful for macro work because you get a bit more image circle when you focus closer.

I have however seen people use this nice bellows to shoot with MF lenses and LF lenses on a 35mm DSLR.

I wonder why he switched, it's probably more down to return rates on costs than actually thinking a D800 produces as good as a 5x4.Much less effort to shoot a D800 than 5x4. If you are shooting for fun not a living, I would get more kick from using a LF camera. In fact I just bought another one, nothing to do with resolution, DR or movements, just the journey from exposure to print.

There are lots of factors that go into camera choice. Remember, Dykinga spends large amounts of time living out the back of a Toyota Tacoma. The reality is that a D800 takes up less space than 4x5 and you don't have to refrigerate your SD cards.